JustAnEngineer wrote:At what point does Daniel Craig surpass Sean Connery as the best Bond ever... or has that already happened?
tanker27 wrote:I was surprised to find that a lot of my co-workers dont like Craig as 007. Me personally I think its fits, I couldnt think of anyone other than Craig. I'll be sad to see him go from the series.
Jigar wrote:Actually, i'll be much happy, as i couldn't see any else other than Pierce Brosnan as 007.
Indeed. I think that's the real difference. The Brosnan films were way overboard and that's probably the reason that I don't like Brosnan Bond. It would be interesting to see Brosnan do something gritty. Connery is just overrated IMO.BiffStroganoffsky wrote:the gritty 'noir' style script and directing they currently use instead of the cheese and fluff that really went overboard
Connery is just overrated IMO.
My turn to give you the "qft+1*9K1"paulWTAMU wrote:I think Brosan got screwed -- Also ranking Moore above Craig is insane. The Moore films were more or less awful.
flip-mode wrote:There is no suspension of disbelief required for the Craig movies. No hybrid-hydroplane-submarines. No dudes with $million worth of diamonds embedded in his face. No dudes who can bite through high strength steel suspension cable. No silly parties in the middle of an arctic ice plate. No Octopussy. No jumping the shark with frickin laser beams. Just hard hitting, glass breaking, blood drawing, concussion-inducing action that you can feel in your chest, served up by some decent acting.
paulWTAMU wrote:I think Brosan got screwed--the man can actually act pretty well, and could probably have done very well with scripts that didn't suck.